by Steve LewickyMaryland prohibits the waiver of punitive damages, or the shortening of time periods to bring suit, in consumer contracts
The Maryland General Assembly recently concluded its 2026 legislative session. One of the bills passed during the session, and signed into law by the Governor, is HB 103. This new law prohibits inclusion in consumer contracts of provisions that would waive, limit, impair, or disclaim statutory damages, punitive damages, declaratory relief, or injunctive relief. Consumer contracts also may not shorten the time available to bring suit under the contract, to a time period shorter than what is provided under Maryland law (typically three years from breach of the contract).
If a consumer contract contains a prohibited provision, a court may not give effect to the prohibited provision, but the court may still enforce the remainder of the contract, to the extent practicable. In other words, inclusion of one of these prohibited provisions does not render the contract void, but the prohibited provision will not be enforced. Inclusion of one of the prohibited provisions also may be considered an “unfair, abusive, or deceptive trade practice” under the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, leading to enforce action brought under that Act.
The new law takes effect October 1, 2026.
by Steve LewickyMaryland expands the time period to bring enforcement actions under local consumer protection laws – from one year to three years
The Maryland General Assembly recently concluded its 2026 legislative session. One of the bills passed during the session, and awaiting the Governor’s signature, is HB 1105/SB 979, which would increase the statute of limitations period from one year to three years for civil enforcement of local consumer protection codes. If the Governor signs the bill into law, it will take effect October 1, 2026.
A number of Maryland counties have local consumer protection laws, separate and distinct from the state Consumer Protection Act. Among those counties are Montgomery, Prince George’s and Howard. The Howard County local consumer protection law, found at Title 17, Subtitle 4 of the county code, prohibits deceptive or unfair trade practices, and authorizes enforcement remedies and penalties. This change to the claim period will most typically affect local consumer protection claims that arise from home improvement disputes, landlord-tenant consumer complaints, or service-contract disputes.
by Lisa WhiteMaryland is a great state to form a Non-Stock Corporation
Maryland’s corporation laws make it a favorable state in which to form a non-stock corporation. A non-stock corporation is a corporation that does not issue shares of stock, and is formed for not-for-profit purposes. The term “non-stock” is different than the designation of an entity as a “501(c)(3)” corporation. The 501(c)(3) designation is an IRS tax-exempt status for a corporation. Non-stock corporations can qualify for tax-exempt status with the IRS, if the entity complies with all necessary requirements. Non-stock corporations can be formed for a variety of purposes, including religious, educational, or charitable. This type of corporate entity often is used by homeowner’s associations, religious groups, trade associations, and other entities that want to run a not-for-profit organization, and take advantage of the benefits afforded to this type of entity.
The State of Maryland provides tax exemptions to non-stock corporations that meet certain requirements. For instance, the state may offer exemption certificates to qualifying non-stock corporations for purchasing personal property without paying sales and use tax. Some non-stock corporations may also be eligible for a state income tax exemption.
Officers of a non-stock corporation receive legal protections from liability, though these protections are not absolute. Limits on liability allow the officers of the company to focus on the mission of the corporation.
Forming a non-stock corporation requires compliance with Maryland’s general corporations law as well as the laws applicable to non-stock corporations. At Lewicky, O’Connor, Hunt, & Meiser, LLC, I assist my clients with forming Maryland non-stock corporations and helping them navigate the process. This includes choosing a name, filing Articles of Incorporation, selecting a Resident Agent, creating By-Laws, and holding organizational meetings. If you or someone you know are interested in forming a non-stock corporation, Lewicky, O’Connor, Hunt, & Meiser, LLC stands ready to assist you.
None of the information provided in this article constitutes legal advice. Every situation is different and should be thoroughly reviewed by and discussed with your legal advisors. Please do not rely on the contents of this article as a basis for making decisions regarding your situation. Please call us to schedule a consultation at (410) 489-1996.
by Steve LewickyAttorney-Client Privilege in Maryland Fiduciary Litigation
The Maryland General Assembly recently concluded its 2026 legislative session. One of the bills passed was HB 65, which resolves uncertainty over whether fiduciaries waive attorney-client privilege when they seek legal advice in a fiduciary capacity, and when fiduciary funds are used to pay counsel. Unless it is vetoed by the Governor, this new law will take effect October 1, 2026.
The key provision of this legislation will establish that, unless waived by the client, a communication between an attorney and a client that acts as a fiduciary is subject to the attorney-client privilege even if fiduciary funds are used to compensate the attorney for legal services rendered to the client. This clarification of the law will be significant in some estate and trust ligation, guardianship disputes, or other disputes involving fiduciaries. In the past, beneficiaries have argued that when a fiduciary seeks legal advice for the benefit of a trust or an estate, and the legal fees are paid out of fiduciary assets, those communications “belong” to the beneficiaries and should not be privileged from disclosure to the beneficiaries. Through HB 65, the Legislature has now rejected that argument, unless the privilege is actually waived. The bill expressly provides: “The existence of a fiduciary relationship between a fiduciary and a beneficiary does not constitute or give rise to a waiver of the attorney-client privilege.”
This bill, if signed by the Governor, will strengthen privilege assertions in fiduciary litigation by trustees, personal representatives, guardians, agents under powers of attorney, and other fiduciaries. While some jurisdictions outside Maryland recognize a version of the fiduciary exception under which beneficiaries are treated as the “real clients,” HB 65 moves Maryland in the opposite direction, by codifying privilege protection.
by David HisleSupervised Probation in Maryland
Supervised probation in Maryland is a common alternative to incarceration that allows individuals to remain in the community under the supervision of the Department of Parole and Probation. While probation can be an opportunity to avoid jail time, it often comes with strict conditions that must be followed.
Supervised probation is a period of supervision by the Department of Parole and Probation imposed by the court instead of, or following, incarceration. The goal is to promote rehabilitation while still holding the individual accountable. The Department of Parole and Probation assigns an agent who ensures that the individual abides by court‑ordered conditions such as maintaining employment, attending counseling, staying within particular geographic boundaries, submitting to drug/alcohol testing, or avoiding further legal trouble. Violating any of these conditions, even minor ones, can lead to serious consequences. A probation violation may occur if the individual fails to meet a condition, commits a new offense, or is otherwise deemed noncompliant. When this happens, the probation agent may file a Violation of Probation (VOP) petition with the court, which may result in revocation of the probation, an extended probation period, or continued probation with modified or stricter conditions. The Court has broad discretion in these violations of probation cases, and the standard of proof is lower than in a criminal trial – meaning it is easier for the state to prove a probation violation.
In some cases, individuals who have successfully completed a substantial portion of their probation may request early termination. The court has the discretion to grant these requests if it finds the individual has met all conditions and poses a low risk of reoffending.
